We still need to convince ourselves of some basic facts about the previous lecture, for example is the map injective?
Example: Cut the sphere along the equator. Then the diagram we have is
Definition: Let be a connected graph (i.e. a 1-dimensional CW-complex). For each vertex
(resp. edge
) let
(resp.
) be a group. If
are vertices adjoining an edge e then let
be an injective homomorphism. This data determines a graph of groups
.
We say that has:
- underlying graph
- vertex groups
- edge groups
- edge maps
Similarly, we have:
Definition: Let be a connected graph. For each vertex
(resp.
) let
(resp.
) be a connected CW-complex. If
adjoin
let
be
-injective continuous maps. This data determines a graph of spaces
. It has underlying graph
, vertex spaces
, edge spaces
, etc. The graph of spaces
determines a space as follows: define
where for
. We say that
is a graph-of-spaces structure (or decomposition) for
.
Remark: There is a natural map (by collapsing all the edge and vertex spaces).
Given any graph of groups we can construct a graph of spaces
with underlying graph
by assigning
and realizing the edge maps as continuous maps
. We write
for
. This is well-defined up to homotopy equivalence.
Definition: The fundamental group of is just
Examples:
- If
then
- If
then - Let
be an embedded multicurve (disjoint union of circles) inside a surface. Cutting along
decomposes
into a graph of spaces and
into a graph of groups.
Note: The edge maps of are only defined up to free (i.e. unbased) homotopy. Translated to
, this means that only the conjugacy class of
in
matters.
Remark: The map induces a surjection
Here’s a way to construct a graph of groups. Let’s suppose acts on a tree
without edge inversions (we can do this by subdividing edges if necessary). Let
. The group
acts diagonally on
The quotient
has a structure of a graph of spaces. The underlying graph is
and there is a natural map
.
Let be a vertex below
. The preimage of
is just
where
is the stabilizer of
. Similarly, for
below
, the preimage of
is
If adjoins
then
so the edge map
is a covering map and therefore
-injective. We have defined a graph of spaces
and
since
is simply connected.
Applying to everything, we have a graph of groups
. Its underlying graph is
. Its vertex groups are the vertex stabilizers of
, its edge groups are the edge stabilizers, and the edge maps are the inclusions. Also,
.
Question for next time: Does every graph of groups arise in this way?

3 comments
Comments feed for this article
14 February 2010 at 5.41 pm
Adeel
The definition of graph of groups is not the same as it is given in Hatcher. it seems that by subdivision, the definition above would reduce to Hatcher’s version. However, what not clear is how the edge homomorphism will be modified. Moreover, Hatcher used mapping cylinder to construct graph of spaces.
14 February 2010 at 7.12 pm
Henry Wilton
Adeel,
The standard definition of a graph of groups is given in Serre’s book Arbres. The above definition is modelled on the one given by Scott and Wall in their article ‘Topological methods in group theory’ (Homological group theory (Proc. Sympos., Durham, 1977), pp. 137–203, London Math. Soc. Lecture Note Ser., 36, Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge-New York, 1979), though it may differ in some details. In practice, it coincides both with Serre’s and theirs.
I haven’t looked at Hatcher’s definition recently, but I have no doubt that with some thought you will see that it is essentially the same.
Note that the definition of graph of spaces above is a generalisation of a mapping cylinder! Just take
to be the connected graph with one edge and two vertices; label one vertex by the domain of your favourite map and the other by the range; label the edge by the domain; take one edge map to be the identity, and the other to be your favourite map.
16 February 2010 at 10.37 pm
Adeel
That is what I thought, but need some confirmation. I was bit uncomfortable choosing one map to be identity. Thanks!
\Adeel